Status of Outer Planet Flagship Mission Studies Curt Niebur June 8, 2007 Planetary Science Subcommittee Mtg
Expectations and Groundrules Need studies to be as complementary as possible Each study has unique heritage and readiness, but studies must address common items Define and prioritize science Characterize mission concept and implementation Technology definition and readiness assessment Estimate cost Identify and assess risk Mission cost target of $3B Conservative Philosophy Cost estimates will not decrease as we move toward development Funds for technology development are limited, so adopt a conservative approach to the use of new technologies Provide descopes with cost deltas to provide flexibility in sizing mission Studies guided by common groundrules to provide a standard for content, final product, and common assumptions 2
Study Structure Phase 1: define science, explore architectures, conduct trades, narrow concepts Phase 2: Refine concepts, define implementation, estimate cost, assess mission risk and value Target Science Possible Science Objectives and Instruments Scenarios Measurements Down-select to most Identify Possible Promising Mission Architecture Options Concepts (at most 2) Phase I Phase II Concept(s ) A (and B) Implementation Parameters: Science and Instrument, Management, System Engineering, Mission Design, Launch Vehicle, Safety and Mission Assurance, Flight Elements, Mission Operations Cost Cost Estimate Science Mission Value, Msn Summary: Tech, Method Risk Cost, Sci value, Cost Risk Drivers 3
Status and Schedule All studies have completed Phase 1 gate review All teams have defined and prioritized science objectives Europa, Titan, and JSO teams working on detailed design of downselected concepts Enceladus team will continue exploring its trade space Phase 2 Review: July 19-20 Final Report: August 29 TMC and Science Review: Oct. 2, 4, 16, and 18 Briefings to community OPAG: May 2 COMPLEX: July 23 Ices, Oceans, and Fire Workshop: August 13 4
Europa Study: Status and Progress Study led by JPL Study Lead: Karla Clark (JPL) SDT Chairs: Ron Greeley (ASU) & Bob Pappalardo (JPL) Study builds on long history of previous work to quickly proceed through trades to detailed design Progress Significant progress on two critical issues of mission Radiation: refined radiation model indicates significant reduction of dosage; many rad hard components now available at high TRL Mass: currently carrying 54% mass contingency plus additional ~200 kg of LV capability unused Draft final report complete Mission design requires minimal technology development 17 step descope list halves payload mass and power Coauthoring white paper with JSO SDT on science synergy with JSO concept Issues: Mission requires near 24/7 DSN coverage at Europa Significant jovian system science possible but not yet defined Rad hard parts availability and performance must be validated (ongoing) Lifetime analysis needs to be completed Rad hard memory 5
Europa Mission Concept Concept: Europa Orbiter with Galilean tour Science: Explore Europa and investigate its habitability Launch Vehicle: Delta IV-H Trajectory: VEEGA Power Supply: MMRTG or ASRG Mission Timeline Launch: ~6/2015 Jupiter Arrival: ~7/2021 Galilean Satellite Tour Science: ~1.5-2.5 yrs Europa prime mapping: ~90 days Spacecraft operates until loss of control and impact into Europa surface Instruments: 11 (163 kg, 172 W) Mass and Power Margins: 54% Unallocated Mass: ~200 kg 6
Titan: Status and Progress Study led by APL Study Lead: James Leary (APL) SDT Chairs: Hunter Waite (SWRI) & Ralph Lorenz (APL) Study builds on history of previous work second only to Europa to quickly proceed through trades to detailed design Team considered variety of combinations of orbiter, lander(s), aerial vehicle(s) in Phase 1 Downselect guided by science and technical considerations led to architecture with orbiter and lander plus aerobot for detailed study in Phase 2 Progress Robust descope options available to reduce cost, risk, mass, and power (descope list is TBD) Architecture provides comprehensive and exciting science Early analysis indicates mission will fit on an Atlas 551, reducing costs while allowing for possibility of mass growth to a Delta IVH Issues: Mission complexity arising from three spacecraft Technology development: 3.5 years required for technology readiness demonstrations Aerocapture (enabling for this mission) Balloon technology, deployment, operation Cryogenic environment and sampling Significant detailed design work (especially for lander and aerobot) remains to be done and will impact mission details Aerobot treated as Mars Pathfinder-class mission: technology demo with significant science Planetary protection approach needs to be developed 7
Titan Mission Concept Concept: Titan orbiter with lander plus aerobot Science: Exploring an organic-rich Earth-like world Launch Vehicle: Atlas 551 Trajectory: gravity assists (TBD) Power Supply: ASRG for orbiter, MMRTG for lander and balloon (trades TBD) Mission Timeline Launch: ~6/2018 Titan Arrival: ~2028 Lander and Aerobot released Lander targeted to dunes Balloon targeted to 30deg latitude, completes 2 circumnavigations Orbiter aerocaptures into 1700 km circular near polar Titan orbit Three mission elements Titan Orbiter: 4 year lifetime, 163 kg payload, 319 W Titan Lander: 1 year lifetime, 46 kg payload, 65 W Titan Balloon: 1 year lifetime, 36 kg payload, 97 W Mass and Power Margins: TBD Unallocated Mass: TBD 8
JSO: Status and Progress Study led by JPL Study Lead: Johnny Kwok (JPL) SDT Chairs: Louise Prockter (APL) & Dave Senske (JPL) Team benefiting from Europa work to increase pace of progress Mission Philosophy: Long-term (~5 year) Jupiter system science encompassing objectives for entire Jupiter system Team considered 4 mission concepts during phase 1 Ganymede elliptical orbiter with Jupiter atmospheric probe Ganymede elliptical orbiter with large (1m or greater) optical system Ganymede circular orbiter (selected for Phase 2) Ganymede elliptical orbiter on smaller launch vehicle with reduced payload Progress Evaluated science and technical aspects of all four concepts to support downselect Significant effort finding tour and Ganymede orbits that meet science needs Integrating diverse science objectives and targets proved a challenge Coauthoring white paper with Europa SDT on science synergy with Europa concept Final Team X design session next week Issues: Detailed design work (mass, downlink, power, etc.), is currently underway and will change some mission details Similar radiation dosage as Europa; further analysis may slightly decrease dosage Planetary protection approach needs to be developed 9
JSO Mission Concept Concept: Long-lived (~5 year) Jupiter System Observer encompassing science objectives for entire Jupiter system Science: Study the Galilean satellites (surfaces, interiors, atmospheres) and Jupiter (atmosphere and magnetosphere) as a means of understanding the jovian system as a whole Launch Vehicle: Delta IV-H Trajectory: VEEGA Power Supply: MMRTG (trade TBD) Mission Timeline Launch: 8/2022 (worst case opportunity) Jupiter Arrival: ~6 yr cruise Galilean Satellite Tour: ~2.5 yrs 2 Io flybys, 6 Europa, ~15 Ganymede, ~10 Callisto Ganymede Orbit: ~2 years 1 yr elliptical orbit for magnetospheric science (200 x 25000 km, ~60deg incl.) 1 yr circular polar orbit for mapping and geophysics (100 km, ~90deg inclination) Spacecraft operates until loss of control and impact into Ganymede surface Instruments: 14 (234 kg, ~200W) Mass and Power Margins: set at ~43% Unallocated Mass: TBD 10
Enceladus: Status and Progress Study led by GSFC Study Lead: Andrea Razzaghi (GSFC) SDT Chairs: John Spencer (SWRI) & Amy Simon-Miller (GSFC) Enceladus is a new destination with extremely little study heritage Unlike other studies, this team is starting from scratch Team identified 11 broad mission concepts of interest Progress Performed rapid evaluation of science value and technical feasibility of all 11 concepts Completed design runs on two of three downselected mission concepts (Saturn orbiter with Enceladus lander and Enceladus orbiter) Final IMDC design run next week Issues: Results of two design runs suggest more work needs to be done identifying and investigating tradespace to meet major technical hurdles for mission Delta V requirements and trajectories Landing systems Sampling systems Technology Development: More efficient nav support Cryogenic environment and sampling Lander EDL for small, airless, rough bodies with poorly known surface properties Planetary protection approach needs to be developed Consensus from larger science community on scientific goals and measurements for mission 11
Enceladus Mission Concept Concept: Saturn Orbiter drops off small Enceladus (soft) Lander Science: Understand the formation, maintenance and implications of the unique geyser features on Enceladus Launch Vehicle: Delta IV-H Trajectory: 25 kw SEP stage with EGA Power Supply: ASRG Mission Timeline Launch: 4/2018 Saturn Arrival: 7.5 yr cruise Orbital Adjustment: <1 yr Enceladus Tour: ~1.5 yr ~50 Enceladus flybys Short lived soft lander (1 week) Spacecraft disposal into Saturn Orbiter Instruments: 8 (~63 kg, ~90 W) Lander Instruments: 8 (~12 kg, ~50 W) Mass and Power Margins: set at ~30% Unallocated Mass: Maybe Concept: Enceladus Orbiter Science: Understand the formation, maintenance and implications of the unique geyser features on Enceladus Launch Vehicle: Delta IV-H Trajectory: VEEGA (chemical) Power Supply: ASRG Mission Timeline Launch: 9/2018 Saturn Arrival: 11.5 yr cruise Orbital Adjustment: ~3 yrs Including ~25 Rhea flybys to pumpdown orbit Enceladus Orbit: ~2.4 yr Mapping orbit at 45deg inclination and 200 km Short duration polar orbit at 100 km Spacecraft impacts Enceladus at EOM Orbiter Instruments: 8 (~65 kg, ~80 W) Mass and Power Margins: set at ~30% Unallocated Mass: Yes 12
Supplementary Material 13
Background and Implementation In response to PSS/OPAG recommendations and discussions, PSD is conducting detailed studies for several flagship missions Europa (JPL) Titan (APL) Enceladus (GSFC) Ganymede/Jovian System Observer (JPL) At OPAG s suggestion, studies distributed across several institutions Science community participation via SDTs and reports to OPAG Public call for SDT members in December 2006 resulted in >300 responses Studies started in Jan 2007 and will be completed fall 2007 Study results will be used as input to near term NASA strategic planning for flagship missions 14
SDT Charter The SDTs are charged with defining the science content of the missions and working closely with the engineering team to define a mission concept(s) that optimizes science, cost, and risk. The SDTs are also responsible for defining and defending the science value of the mission concept(s). To accomplish this, SDTs must work closely with engineering teams SDTs should not work in a vacuum Build upon previous work by other groups (Decadal Survey, OPAG, etc.) 15
Independent Review All studies will undergo independent review TMC panel run by NASA Langley Will assess technical factors, risk, readiness, cost, schedule, etc. Science panel formed by HQ Will assess clarity and prioritization of science objectives, relevance, methodology, value of science floor, etc. Reviews scheduled for early October Study and review results will be factors considered by HQ when deciding how to proceed 16
Overview of Groundrules RPS Restricted to MMRTG, ARTG, SRG, RHU Planetary Protection Categorizations obtained from PPO at HQ Launch Vehicles and Cost Restricted to Atlas 5 and Delta IVH Technology Philosophy Adopt a conservative approach to the use of new technologies and development plans for development of needed technology Launch Dates (2015-2022) DSN Capability International Contributions Although international participation is expected to be an important component of any flagship mission, for the purposes of this study it should be assumed that no international collaborations or contributions are available 17
Study Final Report Final Report due to NASA on Aug. 29 A public version of the report will be released in October 18
Outline 19
Titan Science Exploring an organic-rich Earth-like world Titan is a thematically broad science target ideally suited for a capable flagship mission Science Objectives: Titan s Origin and Evolution: What was Titan formed of, what is the extent of differentiation and geochemical processing that has occurred since formation, and how does it contrast with other solar system bodies? Titan as a System: How do we explain the similarities and differences between Titan and other solar system bodies in the context of the processes operating there? Organics and Life s Origins: What are the processes responsible for the complexity of Titan s organic chemistry? 20
Jupiter System Science Four science themes for the mission Galilean Satellites: Understand the mechanisms responsible for surface features; determine surface compositions; and determine the composition, origin, and evolution of satellite atmospheres Interiors: Determine the interior structures and processes operating in the Galilean satellites in relation to the formation and history of the Jupiter system and potential habitability of the moons Magnetosphere: Understand the magnetospheric environments of Jupiter, its moons and their interactions Jovian Atmosphere: Understand the processes that maintain the composition, structure and dynamics of the jovian atmosphere as a type example of a gas giant planet 21
Enceladus Science Overarching goal is to understand the formation, maintenance and implications of the unique geyser features on Enceladus What role, if any, does tidal heating play in geyser formation? What is the nature of the interior structure, and is liquid water ubiquitous? What is the composition, including organics, ammonia, clathrates and silicates? What drives the extensive tectonics and are they influencing surface features? Is cryovolcanism active elsewhere on the planet and what are the resurfacing and escape rates at the pole? What other processes alter the visible surface and do they influence the interior? What is the biological potential and is there evidence of life, past or present? How does Enceladus interact with the rest of Saturnian system? 22